Survey of Vitreoretinal Specialists in the United States Regarding Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objective: To evaluate the attitudes, beliefs, and practice patterns of vitreoretinal specialists regarding the utilization of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to identify features which may predict future telemedicine use. Methods: An 11-question anonymous survey was completed electronically in July 2020 by vitreoretinal specialists practicing in the United States. Results: The survey response rate was 13.0% (361/2,774). Thirty-five respondents (9.7%) had used telemedicine before March 1, 2020; after March 1, 2020, 170 (47.1%) reported using telemedicine (p < 0.001). Of the 170 respondents who reported telemedicine use, a majority (65.3%;111/170) performed 0-5 patient visits per week. Female retina specialists, younger physicians, and those with prior telemedicine usage were more likely to use telemedicine. Barriers to telemedicine use included concern for misdiagnosis (332/361, 92.0%), inability to obtain optical coherence tomography imaging (330/361, 91.4%), inability to obtain fundus imaging (327/361, 90.6%), lack of access to and/or comfort with the technology (261/361, 72.3%), potential legal liability (229/361, 63.4%), and low reimbursement (227/361, 62.9%). The majority of respondents (225/361; 62.3%) reported that telemedicine without ancillary imaging was not an acceptable way to evaluate patients. However, 59.2% (214/361) would find telemedicine acceptable if remote imaging was available. Conclusions: The pandemic led to a rapid adoption of telemedicine by vitreoretinal specialists. The majority of specialists using telemedicine performed five or fewer visits per week. The availability of remote imaging may increase confidence in clinical outcomes with a subsequent increase in utilization of telemedicine by vitreoretinal specialists.

Bacterial Dispersion Associated With Various Patient Face Mask Designs During Simulated Intravitreal Injections.

PURPOSE: We sought to investigate bacterial dispersion with patient face mask use during simulated intravitreal injections. DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional study. METHODS: Fifteen healthy subjects were recruited for this single-center study. Each participant was instructed not to speak for 2 minutes, simulating a "no-talking" policy, while in an ophthalmic examination chair with an blood agar plate secured to the forehead and wearing various face masks (no mask, loose fitting surgical mask, tight-fitting surgical mask without tape, tight-fitting surgical mask with adhesive tape securing the superior portion of the mask, N95 mask, and cloth mask). Each scenario was then repeated while reading a 2-minute script, simulating a talking patient. The primary outcome measures were the number of colony-forming units (CFUs) and microbial species. RESULTS: During the "no-talking" scenario, subjects wearing a tight-fitting surgical mask with tape developed fewer CFUs compared with subjects wearing the same mask without tape (difference 0.93 CFUs [95% confidence interval 0.32-1.55]; P = .003). During the speech scenarios, subjects wearing a tight-fitting surgical mask with tape had significantly fewer CFUs compared with subjects without a face mask (difference 1.07 CFUs; P = .001), subjects with a loose face mask (difference 0.67 CFUs; P = .034), and subjects with a tight face mask without tape (difference 1.13 CFUs; P < .001). There was no difference between those with a tight-fitting surgical mask with tape and an N95 mask in the "no-talking" (P > .99) and "speech" (P = .831) scenarios. No oral flora were isolated in "no-talking" scenarios but were isolated in 8 of 75 (11%) cultures in speech scenarios (P = .02). CONCLUSION: The addition of tape to the superior portion of a patient's face mask reduced bacterial dispersion during simulated intravitreal injections and had no difference in bacterial dispersion compared with wearing N95 masks.